Saturday, June 13, 2009

“Tom Flanagan also warns that Mr. Harper's credibility is “getting tattered” after a string of reversals on policies – from income trusts to fixed election dates to equalization, creating a “widespread impression that [he] stands for nothing in particular, except winning and keeping power” in Ottawa.”

Couldn’t have said it better myself, except however to point out that Harper’s tax leakage argument is a total fraud, cooked up my Mark Carney and Jim Flaherty as the false basis on which to rationalize the income trust policy reversal/betrayal. Did breaking the fixed election date promise or breaking the equalization promise destroy $35 billion of retirement savings or destroy people’s quality of living and dignity during retirement? Didn’t think so, which is why the income trust issue will never go away until the policy reflects the truth that income trusts do not cause tax leakage and have enormous benefits to confer upon Canada and for the betterment of all Canadians. (If you think otherwise, then your understanding of income trusts and their far reaching policy ramifications is superficial at best).

2 comments:

This past week , all parties in the HoC agreed that something must be done to enhance income for seniors & those retired.

The unfortunate thing is that short-sightedness once again prevailed as they continued to only look at enhancing CPP , Old Age Security & Supplements.

What about all those others out there who have the ability to enhance their own income levels by investing in the Canadian business world & sharing in the profits.

Income trusts were ideal as they paid-out at sufficient yields to make the risk worthwhile , whereas corporate dividends were miniscule at best & therefore forced investors to make the choice that allowed trusts to become so popular (unfortunately , it was for this same reason these same corps put the call into Flaherty to stun the trust world & level the playing field in their favor).

Retirees had found a way to raise their income levels with no help from the gov`t.

Now , however , the gov`t interference in the trust market has left these same investors more reliant on the gov`t for the same services they were once paying for themselves.

Either the politicians want to help us or not.

The best thing they can do most of the time is leave us alone & let market forces work themselves out with time.

EVENTS

Income Trust Halloween VigilThanks to all who participated in both the Ottawa and Calgary vigils to mark the anniversary of the announcement.

WE"D LIKE SOME ANSWERS

As you well know, the ‘income trust thing’ has grown beyond the
question of whether fair taxes are paid on income from trusts. It’s
become a giant dirty snowball, and as it rolls forward it accumulates
more and more bulk. There are so many unanswered questions. Let's list a few and invite our "Accountable" government and our free press to provide some much-needed answers.

It is said “Trusts are inefficient use of capital. Why?” Two
related questions are ‘Whose money is it, anyway?’, and ‘Do Canadian
investors have a free and efficient market?’

How can information that is already in the public domain at SEDAR
make for a state secret? How could such information be used to harm
the Canadian national interest? And who would cause the harm?

Why won’t the Canadian media investigate the falsehoods and
misrepresentations told by the Minister of Finance to a committee of
Parliament? Was the Minister in contempt of Parliament?

Why won’t the Canadian media report (a) government tax revenues
gained from BCE in 2006 when BCE was a corporation to (b) government
tax revenues that would be gained in 2007 from BCE, if BCE had been
allowed to proceed to a trust, and (c) government tax revenues that
will be gained in 2007 from BCE, when BCE ownership has been carved
up as 45% foreign ownership and 55% large Canadian pension fund
ownership?